Lydiard Tregoz Parish Council unanimously decided to continue their support for Taylor Wimpey’s controversial planning application to build 48 new homes in Lydiard Park.

Tregoz Parish Council allocated five minutes for Kevin Fisher, spokesperson for the Lydiard Heritage Action Group, to address their meeting yesteday evening. A further five minutes was allocated for councillors to ask questions, although in reality the debate lasted slightly longer, continuing for several minutes after the Tregoz egg-timer had gone off.

Mr Fisher asked Tregoz Parish Council to reconsider their decision to back the Taylor Wimpey application in view of the overwhelming objections to the proposals. (Of 601 representation letters, just two people had written in support. Robert Buckland and James Gray MP were against the proposals, as were Lydiard Millicent Parish Council and Swindon Borough Council).

However, the Tregoz Parish Council Chairman said he thought Mr Fisher was being “very presumptious” in his request. It was not Mr Fisher’s place to try to talk the Parish Council out of a decision they had made at the last Parish Council meeting, and his attitude was “disgraceful.”

Mr Fisher explained that he, and a lot of other people, were struggling to understand the reasons behind Tregoz’s support for the application. That was the rationale behind his requests for information made under the Freedom of Information Act. It should be seen as a data gathering exercise, and he refuted suggestions made at the meeting that he was accusing councillors of any impropriety. He offered to put the correspondence on Shaw Residents Association’s website so that people could make up their own minds.

Tregoz Parish Council also took issue with the report which appeared in the Swindon Advertiser concerning their decision. According to one councillor, “blatant lies” had been published. Legal action was also mentioned. The Chairman of the Parish Council said he had raised this issue with the Swindon Advertiser, and was disappointed in the stance they had taken.

Mr Fisher said that Lydiard Tregoz Parish Council risked endorsing “the first and most significant domino” in the destruction of the rural buffer. Taylor Wimpey’s application, if granted, would pave “the way for the subsequent development of all the land west of Swindon up to and including Hook village.”

However, Lydiard Tregoz refuted this, maintaining that the gifted land from Taylor Wimpey would provide a valuable buffer between Swindon and the surrounding villages.

Lydiard Millicent “have missed a trick by not grabbing it with both hands,” one councillor said, referring to the proposed gift from Taylor Wimpey.

Mr Fisher did not accept this. He said that the land offered was unlikley to ever be built on because of its heritage status and the risk of flooding. In effect, Taylor Wimpey would be giving nothing of any value away. However, if they were successful on this sensitive location, then they could be confident they would be successful elsewhere. The buffer between Swindon and the villages to the west would then be open to development. Hence, his use of the term domino-effect.

The “gift” land in question is shown in the sketch above. It covers some fields to the south and west of Lydiard Millicent, but leaves open the possibility of developers moving in on land on the other side of Tewkesbury Way and Holborn. One area between Lydiard Stud and the Mews is already the subject of an application by Custom Land for up to 60 new homes.

One Tregoz Councillor said the Taylor Wimpey houses would meet their parish’s housing needs. They were constrained elsewhere in the parish because of the risk of flooding. However, objectors to Taylor Wimpey’s proposals maintain that the proposed development would increase the risk of flooding to Spencer Close and other areas.

Lydiard Tregoz said that they had left the New V Neighbourhood because other parishes were doing so and they could better further their residents’ interests by going it alone. They refuted any suggestion that their departure had been because of conditions imposed by Taylor Wimpey on the gifted land.

(In the main body of the meeting, it was explained that the draft neighbourhood plan would not be available for Mr Fisher’s FOIA request as it was still in draft).

The question and answer time concluded with the councillors unanimously agreeing to continue their support for the development, and the Chairman telling Mr Fisher, “You have your answer there. You can’t keep repeating stuff.”

Swindon Councillors have expressed “grave concern” at Taylor Wimpey’s proposals to build 48 new homes in the shadow of Lydiard House. The plans have also provoked criticism from MPs Robert Buckland, James Gray and local community groups. Online, Taylor Wimpey’s application has provoked hundreds of objections.

Lydiard Millicent Parish Council have formally written to Wiltshire Council telling them why the development should not go ahead, citing conflict with a number of its Core Policies. Planning policies which restrain further development on the west of Swindon, and protect the distinct character and identity of the surrounding villages, are also quoted by the Lydiard Park Heritage Action Trust in their objection.

But not every one is against the application, not quite.

Lydiard Tregoz Parish Council has given its formal reponse as one of support.

At its September meeting, Lydiard Tregoz Parish Council unanimously agreed to note Taylor Wimpey’s application. A spokesperson for Tregoz subsequently explained this meant the application did not give them any cause for concern, being some distance from St Mary’s Church.

If the proposed development goes ahead it would be over three miles by road from Hook, where most of Lydiard Tregoz’s population resides.

Geographically, the development would be much closer to Swindon and Lydiard Millicent than Hook. Indeed, two major criticisms of the proposals are the additional strain the new houses would put on the local infrastructure, and the erosion of the rural buffer between West Swindon and Lydiard Millicent.

Taylor Wimpey have sought to counter the argument that the development would encroach upon the rural buffer. This includes an offer to gift the remainder of its land holding at Lydiard Park to “an appropriate local community body” to protect it from future development. This, they say, “will preserve the surrounding areas, rather than ‘open the door’ to the rest of the fields being developed.”

Not everyone is convinced. Kevin Fisher of the Lydiard Heritage Action Group questions the genuiness of the gift proposal. Rather than make the gift of land conditional on the success of their planning application, he thinks Taylor Wimpey should “simply draw up a contract and gift the land… with no strings attached.”

“By linking the so called ‘gift’ to a Parish Council being required to support their planning application and only then being rewarded with a discussion as part of Section 106 agreement, suggests they are being disingenuous at best,” he says.

A Section 106 Agreement is a term used to describe planning obligations which a developer may enter into with the local authority, linked to a planning permission. Usually its purpose is to mitigate the impact of a development proposal. It is intended to make a development, which otherwise would be unacceptable, acceptable by offsetting the impact on a particular location. A common example is requiring a substitute provision for the loss of open space, or a contribution to the cost of the infrastructure serving the development (for example, through the provision of highway improvements or a new classroom at a school in the new estate’s catchment area).

Critics say Taylor Wimpey is not really giving anything away, that there is no compensation in the gifted land for the potential loss of amenity. Much of the land is within the Historic England listed boundary of Lydiard Park, some is flood plain. Lydiard Park Heritage Action say that “no one would ever get planning permission for that land” and that the pastures are “a liability and not an asset to anyone that is or becomes their caretaker.”

In addition, there is the issue of to whom the land should be gifted, on what terms, and for what purpose.

Earlier in the consultation exercise, there were calls for a three-way lock to prevent future development. In the event of the planning permission being granted, this would have seen the developer entering into covenants with Swindon Council, Lydiard Millicent and Lydiard Tregoz Parish Councils.

However, it appears Lydiard Tregoz will now be the sole beneficiary of any “gift.”

A spokesperson for Taylor Wimpey said, “Our intention is to gift the remaining part of the land to Lydiard Tregoze Parish Council, on the condition that the land must be safeguarded from inappropriate development in perpetuity.”

“Once the legal process has been completed, Lydiard Tregoze Parish will undertake management of the land.”

The land in question is within the parish of Lydiard Tregoz, so too is the application site.

Taylor Wimpey state, in their Planning and Sustainability Statement, dated July 2016, that the “site is a draft allocation in the emerging Lydiard Tregoz Neighbourhood Plan,” which “therefore, represents a significant material consideration in favour of granting planning permission for the development proposed.”

However, Lydiard Tregoz Parish Council voted in May 2016 to leave the New V Neighbourhood Planning Group. To date, no order has been made designating Lydiard Tregoz a discrete neighbourhood planning area, nor has any draft plan been the subject of any public consultation or publicity. So any draft neighbourhood plan appears, at best, amorphous.

No doubt Wiltshire Council will form their own view on what amounts to a “significant material consideration in favour of granting planning permission,” particularly given the potential conflict with its own Core Policies.

Wiltshire Council has a target date of 2 November 2016 for determining Taylor Wimpey’s application. However, there is always the possibility that this timeframe may be extended. And, if unsuccesful, Taylor Wimpey may choose to appeal.

Whatever the outcome, one thing is for certain. The future of Lydiard Park, and the rural buffer, will be hotly debated in the months to come.

Councillors met to discuss Custom Land’s appeal against the refusal of their application for outline planning permission. Local residents also attended, and offered their thoughts on Custom Land’s proposal to build four houses on land off the Mews.

Parking and bin storage is already an issue at the Mews, residents said. Building more homes on the land, with a narrow access way would make things worse.

They also voiced concern that Lydiard is “quite a special place” and that the appeal, if successful, could have a domino-effect. Custom Land have also recently taken informal soundings on plans to build up to 60 homes on land bordering the application site, whilst Taylor Wimpey have applied for permission to build 48 houses off Tewkesbury Way. Residents, therefore, fear a potential pincher movement from developers threatens the green fields, which separate Lydiard from Swindon.

Residents urged the Parish Council to do anything they could to support Wiltshire’s case for refusing the application.

Whether Custom Land’s plans go ahead will now be determined by a planning inspector at an Appeal. A Planning Inspector will consider written representations from the developer, Wiltshire Council and others, and reach a decision. They will consider all the previous information submitted, and any new submissions. In reaching their decision, the Inspector can only take into account information that is relevant to the Appeal. In most cases, the arguments will hinge upon the grounds for refusal set out in the planning authority’s decision letter.

The deadline for new submissions is 20 September. There is no set date by which the Inspector must make a decision. However, the average time taken to determine appeals of this nature is 18 weeks from start to finish.

Unanimously, the Parish Council decided to reiterate their original objections to the proposals, and to draft a new letter to send to the planning inspector. The letter will cover the same grounds, but with a different order of emphasis. In addition, Councillor Sharp suggested that lack of sustainability should be added. Although Lydiard has some facilities, these are limited and stretched. The school is rumoured to be oversubscribed. There is a lack of parking and traffic congestion. The bus service is limited, and under threat. There are better, more sustainable locations, to build the type of homes Custom Land are proposing.

The Parish Council’s original objections include-

Access to the site is via a shared driveway with The Mews, extra traffic would be detrimental to the already congested area.

Refuse Lorries are not currently able to access the road at The Mews (where it is anticipated that the entrance to the new site would be). Residents have to take bins from their houses to a designated area along the road, any new buildings would add to this already unsatisfactory situation.

A recently commissioned Housing Needs Survey for the Parish identified that starter homes and small bungalows for “downsizing” were required within the village and not larger detached family homes.

Surface and flood water currently flows into the field, there is a concern that building works would inhibit this and exacerbate flooding in the area.

The application states it is an infill site; Core Strategy Policy 2 refers to infill as “the filling of a small gap within the village that is only large enough for not more than a few dwellings”. Two suggested layout options show four houses on this site; again reference to the Core Strategy gives a meaning of infill as “generally only one dwelling”.

Building on this side of the village should be discouraged so an Open Space is kept along the border between the Parish and Swindon Borough Council, to stop coalescence of the two.

Out of the council and residents’ original objections, only one is referred to as a grounds for refusal in the planning officer’s decision letter, that the site is not infill.

Wiltshire Council, the planning authority, were bound to determine the application in accordance with National and Local Planning Policies. It based its refusal on more narrow grounds than the wide spectrum of residents’ concerns, maintaining that the proposal was contrary to a number of its Core Policies. In particular, under Core Policy 2, it maintained that development in small villages, like Lydiard Millicent, should be limited to within the existing built area.

In reaching their decision, the planning officer at Wiltshire Council also took the view that the site was not The term infill is defined in the Core Strategy as the filling of a small gap within the village that is only large enough for not more than a few dwellings, generally only one dwelling.

Perhaps not the tightest of definitions. But then planning terms, which must bear application across a wide range of contexts, rarely are. In any case, the meaning of a few remains open to conjecture. In their appeal statement, Custom Land argue that four houses fall within any objective definition of a few and so should be classed as infill. This would then place their proposed development within Core Policy 2, as one suitable for a small village like Lydiard.

Custom Land also argue that the development should be permitted in any case because it would make a contribution to the area’s housing need. The benefit, they argue, would outweigh any potential harm, which the Core Policies are designed to prevent. The legal and planning arguments are complex. However, where a local authority fails to show a sufficient rolling five-year housing supply, less weight can be attached to its Core Policies which may restrict development. In those cases, it is harder to argue against the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in national planning policy. Elsewhere in the county, and nationally, developers have succeeded at appeal using similar arguments where the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a deliverable five-year housing supply.

Custom Land say that Wiltshire cannot show a five-year housing supply so that the presumption in favour of development should prevail.

In their original decision letter, the planning officer for Wiltshire argued that any housing shortfall was slight. In their view, this means sufficient weight should still attach to its Core Policies, and that the harm in deviating from them would outweigh the potential good.

However, Custom Land think otherwise, and Wiltshire Council’s reply on this point should be interesting.

In May of this year, Wiltshire Council withdrew a number of its objections to an appeal by Beechcroft over proposals to build 70 new homes at the Forty in Cricklade. It acknowledged that it was then unable to demonstrate a five-year housing supply. Critics argue that this failure to show an adequate housing supply leaves Wiltshire’s towns and villages vulnerable to inappropriate development, contrary to its own planning policies.

On-street parking and where to put their wheelie bins may be the issues that most concern residents. However, Custom Land’s success or failure, may ultimately depend upon Wiltshire’s ability to show enough homes are being built elsewhere.

Any submissions on Custom Land’s appeal can be made on-line at the planning inspectorate’s website or sent in triplicate to the planning inspector at 2 The Square, Temple Quay House, Bristol, BS1 6PN, quoting reference APP/Y3940/W/3154507.

Local residents are joining forces to fight development proposals, which they fear could spoil Lydiard Park and threaten Lydiard Millicent’s village character.

Lydiard Heritage Action Group formed

A number of community organisations are opposed to the latest proposals. These include Shaw Residents Association, the Friends of Lydiard Park, the Lydiard Park Heritage Trust, together with other Swindon and Lydiard Millicent residents. In a recent development, they have come together under the banner of the Lydiard Heritage Action Group, and are urging everyone to object to the proposals.

Over 100 objections have already been lodged with Wiltshire Council.

More houses, but is this the best place for them?

Taylor Wimpey are applying for planning permission for 48 houses on land off Tewkesbury Way. The proposal is for 29 two to four open market bedroom houses, and nineteen houses for social renting. The latter comprises a compulsory 40% affordable housing element.

Taylor Wimpey have owned the site for 40 years. Their latest application comes after a refusal to develop the site in 1988, and, more recently a series of public consultation exercises.

Objectors say that the proposals will destroy the unique nature of Lydiard Park, which, they emphasise is a country park, and should not be allowed to become just a green space in an urban sprawl.

Sarah Finch-Crisp, who led the Lydiard Park Restoration Project, believes that the proposals would destroy the ‘essential setting’ of Lydiard Park. The houses would be in full view of St. Mary’s Church and the main drive to Lydiard House. ‘Such development will inevitably destroy the tranquillity of this historic rural environment and bring the town to Lydiard’s doorstep,’ she says.

A pincher movement around Lydiard Millicent

There is a real fear that, if granted, permission will open the floodgate for further development. Many people choose to live in Lydiard because of its distinctive village feel. They do not want to be part of an urban conurbation, and value the surrounding countryside.

Another developer, Custom Land, has plans to develop land on the other side of the road, close to Holborn. Coupled with Taylor Wimpey’s proposals, this could see West Swindon spill over into what used to be the Green Belt.

Mike Sharp, a Lydiard Millicent resident, describes Taylor Wimpey’s proposal as part of a pincer movement when taken into context with Custom Land’s plans. He says, it “is a Trojan horse application, [and] if approved, many more fields around Lydiard Park and all the open space between Swindon, Lydiard Millicent, Hook and other outlying villages will fall to developers”.

Taylor Wimpey’s case

Taylor Wimpey, on the other hand, point out that their proposed development is outside of the registered park itself. They also maintain that they are only building on 11% of the land that they own in Lydiard, and have offered to gift surrounding fields to the local community. This, they say, would ensure that they are never built on.

To date, that’s an offer that has not been very warmly received. Objectors point out that the land is marginal, and would not be suitable for development in any event.

Objectors also say that the proposals are contrary to Swindon and Wiltshire’s planning policies. However, Taylor Wimpey say that their proposals would provide much needed housing, and that the council cannot show a five-year housing supply. If so, the policies would be considered out-of-date, giving the developer a much greater chance of success.

Further information

You can find out more about the application at Wiltshire Council’s website. You can make an objection, comment or voice your support there, or by clicking on this link.

Lydiard Millicent completed its draft neighbourhood plan back in September 2014. Nearly two years’ later, there’s at least one major development on the horizon. However, the village still lacks a neighbourhood plan, which could give it a greater say over the location and type of any future development.

Getting a neighbourhood plan adopted is not an easy matter. But why is Lydiard Millicent’s taking so long?

Happy days, it looks like New-V’s website is taking an extended holiday. This is what greets you on its landing page.

At the Parish Council’s next meeting on Thursday, 4th August, it will once again be considering Lydiard Millicent’s continued involvement with the New-V neighbourhood plan. There could even be a question mark over whether Lydiard will proceed with its neighbourhood plan.

Sadly, it’s a longer piece than I would have liked. I have greatly condensed events (honestly). However, I also thought it important, for those who are interested, to let the timeline speak for itself.

The government’s National Planning Guidance says that, where a Parish Council chooses to produce a neighbourhood plan, it should work with the whole community. Other towns and villages have seized the opportunity to make the neighbourhood planning process work for them. (Take a look at Malmesbury).

The Area Board decide that one of these will comprise the Royal Wootton Bassett and Cricklade area and surrounding villages of Purton, Lydiard Millicent, Lydiard Tregoze, Lyneham and Bradenstoke, Tockenham, Broad Town and Clyffe Pypard. Wiltshire Council allocate £21,000 of the frontrunner project funding it has received from central government to the group.

Each parish would be responsible for preparing its own chapter of the overall plan. There would, however, be one plan, comprising chapters on all of the individual villages and an overarching strategy, which would then go through the statutory process of independent examination and referendum.

November 2011 to April 2012

The Localism Act, which formally introduces the neighbourhood planning framework, becomes law. It comes into full effect in April 2012.

June 2012 to November 2012

Wiltshire Council engage contractors to work with the neighbouring planning groups. The late John Bennett attends meetings on behalf of the parish plan subgroup. Workshops are held with Broad Town Parish Council and with neighbourhood planners.

In November 2012, Lydiard Millicent Parish Council vote to support what becomes known as the New-V Neighbourhood Planning Group (New V stands for North East Wiltshire Villages).

December 2012

Wootton Bassett and Cricklade both decide not to proceed with the group, but to forge their own neighbourhood plans. Purton, as lead authority, applies for designation of the remaining parishes as the New-V neighbourhood planning area. This is a formal application required by the legislation. It’s the first formal stage of the neighbourhood planning process, and a statutory period of eight weeks’ consultation follows.

The grouping of, arguably disparate, villages was controversial from the start with allegations of cost-cutting.

One particular criticism was that, in any future referendum, the whole of the New-V area would be voting on proposals that affected other parishes. One could, legitimately, question what say a person living in Lyneham should have over development in Purton or Lydiard.

In the words of one consultee from Purton, Dr Richard Pagett, a “single referendum on the entire plan without the individual parish safeguards [would] be a travesty of democracy”. New-V was not seen as a cohesive grouping from the start, “but merely what is left over after nearly a year of dilly-dallying, and therefore intuitively… a poor and embarrassing basis for going forward.”

January – April 2013

More meetings take place. Lydiard Millicent has public drop-in sessions, sends out surveys and completes its Housing Needs Survey. Work continues on the draft neighbourhood plan.

Lydiard Millicent Parish Council agree that the neighbourhood plan should only include reference to generic rather than specific sites. Further presentations are made in the village, which are well-attended. Public feedback is reflected in further revisions to the draft neighbourhood plan.

January – March 2014

Progress slows due to reconsidering the draft neighbourhood plan in light of Wiltshire’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment and lack of input from contractors (allegedly because of non-payment by Wiltshire Council).

April 2014

The Parish Council Chairman, Andrew Harris, withdraws from the meeting, declaring himself to be an interested party on account of his potential development land.

The Parish Council receive an update on progress. The plan should be completed by May 2014 and submitted to Wiltshire by August 2014, the meeting is told. The Parish Council agree to spend £20 on the cost of printing a leaflet to publicise the draft plan around the village.

May – July 2014

Further meetings. The steering group considers specific sites for inclusion in the draft neighbourhood plan. However, instead, a set of criteria is developed for inclusion as part of the Plan. New developments and proposals would then be judged against these criteria.

In July, the Council is told that the project is nearing completion, but there are some issues with Lydiard Tregoze.

September – October 2014

The Lydiard Millicent chapter of the New-V draft neighbourhood plan is completed, and uploaded onto the website for four weeks’ consultation.

The Parish Council listen to plans for the next stage; the other parish chapters must be collated prior to submission to Wiltshire Council for review, consultation, independent review and referendum.

December 2014

Common Places, the contractors engaged by Wiltshire Council for New-V, according to the Parish Council minutes, are disengaged for not completing the work expected of them. Wiltshire Council are now providing the necessary assistance to New-V directly.

January – December 2015

Regular updates are given at the monthly Parish Council meetings. Progress, apparently, is being made.

In December 2015, the Parish Council is given advance notice that they will be asked to confirm their approval of the draft Neighbourhood Plan at the January meeting. This is necessary before the plan can go to its six-week statutory public consultation, the next step to its being adopted.

January 2016

At Lydiard Millicent Parish Council’s meeting on January 7th, the Chairman withdraws from the debate as an interested party.

Councillor Pepperell asks the Council to approve the resolutions put forward by the New-V Planning Group. These are to approve the area-wide objectives and policies and the draft Lydiard Millicent chapter of the neighbourhood plan (which is substantively the same as that uploaded by the Parish Council to its website for consultation in September 2014). The Council is also asked to authorise “minor changes to the draft chapters in the interests of clarity, accuracy and consistency before it is published.” Councillor Pepperell explains that these are not intended to be substantive, but would be administrative in nature.

Some councillors are not happy because they say they have not had enough time to read and consider the draft plan and accompanying papers.

The Parish Council resolves to defer the matter to a future meeting, and requests Councillor Pepperell to liaise with Wiltshire Council for clarification on the wording of the resolution, and for more information on when a decision is needed.

February 2016

The Parish Council finally approve the draft neighbourhood plan.

However, in the meantime, Lyneham and Bradenstoke and Purton, have announced their decisions to withdraw from the New-V group.

Councillor Pepperell warns there may be issues with Lydiard Tregoze too. If Lydiard Tregoze withdraw, it will be hard for Lydiard Millicent to continue in New-V, as the parish will no longer form part of a contiguous area.

March – April 2016

A hiatus ensues as clarification is sought over Lydiard Tregoze’s intentions.

Lydiard Millicent Parish Council resolves not to object to Purton and Lyneham and Bradenstoke leaving the New-V group.

May 2016

New-V Steering group meeting, held in the Jubilee Club House, on 12 May, clashes with the Parish Council meeting being held less than a mile away, in the Parish Hall. Deliberation and debate on the neighbourhood plan, therefore, are held over until next month.

The Parish Council resolve to send the following statement to the NEW-V Neighbourhood Planning Steering Group.

“It is the understanding of Lydiard Millicent Parish Council that if Lydiard Tregoz exits NEW-V, Wiltshire Council will be unable to allow Lydiard Millicent to continue as part of the NEW-V Group as this will not make sense in Planning terms.

Accordingly, whilst respecting the wish of Lydiard Tregoz Parish Council it is RESOLVED TO OBJECT to their leaving NEW-V, unless Wiltshire Council can provide assurances to the satisfaction of the Parish Council that the Parish of Lydiard Millicent will not be detrimentally affected.”

Although perhaps not all of the councillors appreciated it at the time, the Council’s Standing Orders provide that a resolution cannot be reversed within six months except by a special motion. The resolution could, therefore, potentially delay progress further.

July 2016

The official minutes for the July Parish Council Meeting record that it was “RESOLVED to continue with work on current chapters written for Lydiard Millicent, making any necessary adjustments; and to contact Wiltshire Council for a definitive view on this Councils future position with NEW-V.”

Lydiard Millicent could be missing out on the opportunity to influence important planning decisions.

Lydiard Millicent’s Chapter of the draft New V Neighbourhood Plan was finalised, and circulated around the village, in September 2014. Yet Lydiard still lacks a neighbourhood plan. Whilst Purton pushes ahead with their own neighbourhood plan, progress on Lydiard’s has ground to a halt.

With Custom Land posed to submit an application for 60 new homes off the Mews, some would argue that a neighbourhood plan has never been more needed.

In the first of three articles on the neighbourhood plan, we answer two questions What’s a neighbourhood plan, and does Lydiard Millicent need one anyway?

What’s a neighbourhood plan?

Neighbourhood plans were made possible under the Localism Act 2011. The basic idea is to give local communites a say in how their areas are developed.

A Neighbourhood Plan is a community-led document, which becomes part of the local plan when adopted. This means the planning authority has to consider it when they are deciding whether or not to grant permission for new developments.

For areas, like Lydiard Millicent, where there is a parish council, the parish council is responsible for producing the neighbourhood plan. However, following National Planning Guidance, the council should work with other members of the community who are interested in, or affected by the neighbourhood plan, allowing them to play an active role in preparing the neighbourhood plan.

This reflects that deciding what goes into the neighbourhood plan should be a bottom-up, grass roots process. People in the community should come together, to share their vision for the future. Through debate, consultation, and a fair amount of paper-pushing, this is then pulled together into a draft neighbourhood plan. The process of formal adoption can then begin.

Lydiard Millicent’s case is complicated by its membership of a wider neighbourhood planning area, called New V (North East Wiltshire Villages). Although Lydiard’s chapter of the New V neighbourhood plan was completed in September 2014, other villages were not ready. Since then there has been further delay and disagreement. The net result is that, nearly two years later, Lydiard Millicent is no closer to seeing its neighbourhood plan adopted.

What’s in a neighbourhood plan for Lydiard?

A neighbourhood plan can’t block development, and it has to be consistent with the county’s wider strategic plan. However, the policies and proposals in a neighbourhood plan are relevant when planning applications are determined. So, for example, if a community wants to see affordable housing in a particular area, or to protect an open space, the neighbourhood plan should reflect this.

In Lydiard Millicent’s case, the draft neighbourhood plan says that the community “has its own identity and wishes to remain a separate village, avoiding coalescence with Swindon.” It also says that “there is a desire for high quality, environmentally sensitive, small scale development to provide housing to accommodate the older population and young people/families who wish to remain in the village.”

If the plan were adopted, then the planning authority would have to give material consideration to these things when considering any future application for development. However, with the draft plan in its current state, the planning authorities cannot attach any weight to it. In planning terms, it’s irrelevant.

Another reason for adopting a neighbourhood plan is that it allows the community to keep a higher proportion of any community infrastructure levy (“CIL”) within the community.

The CIL is effectively a contribution imposed on developers to reflect the additional costs on infrastructure. Without a neighbourhood plan in place, the parish is entitled to 15% of the receipts. With a neighbourhood plan in place, this percentage rises to 25%. Having a neighbourhood plan in place means more money can be spent on the local community where the development is taking place, rather than in the wider local authority area.

That means Lydiard Millicent could see a bigger chunk of money to fund community projects.

In future articles, we’ll be looking at Lydiard Millicent and the New V neighbourhood plan, including a timeline, and where Lydiard Millicent goes from here.

In the meantime, if anybody’s got any news or views on the neighbourhood plan, then we’d love to hear them.

Custom Land plan to build up to 60 new homes on the land between the Street and Meadow Springs. Although the developer has yet to make a planning application, it said that it saw the informal consultation as a way of giving local residents the opportunity to comment on its proposals.

The event aroused a lot of interest, so much that a queue formed outside the Parish Hall before the consultation opened. At times, it was hard to take in the detail on the boards through the crowds.

Those who missed the event, or who just want a better look at the boards at leisure, can view the presentation here. Click on the link below to view a PDF of the consultation boards.

Residents are invited to “a public consultation event” to hear about a developer’s plans to build up to 60 new homes in Lydiard Millicent.

Custom Land are organising the event, which will take place on 14th July in the Parish Hall, between 7.30 and 9.30pm.

Custom Land was recently unsuccessful in its application to build four homes off the Mews. However, its latest plans are far more extensive and encompass the land to the south of the original site, bordering Meadow Springs and Badger’s Brook. The developer has yet to lodge a formal application, so the planned event is an opportunity for villagers to find out what is going on and to make their views known.

Custom Land’s previous application was vigourously opposed by local residents and the Parish Council. It failed, largely on the technical grounds that it did not constitute “infill.” However, the case law on housing need continues to develop, as does the politcial and social pressure for more homes. The draft neighbourhood plan for Lydiard shows other preferred areas for development and stresses the need to preserve a rural buffer from Swindon. However, the implosion of the neighbourhood planning process means the neighbourhood plan remains unadopted, and won’t be taken into account when any application is considered.

Star Planning’s application attracted 38 objections, including one from the Parish Council. The most common grounds for objection were highway issues and lack of parking, ecological issues, bin storage, and the risk of coalescence with Swindon.

None of these were considered a bar to the development in themselves. However, the Council still chose to refuse the application. It took the view the proposals would not promote a sustainable pattern of development. It also found them inconsistent with Wiltshire’s Core Strategy.

Under Wiltshire’s Core Strategy, Lydiard Millicent no longer has a defined settlement boundary. However, it is classified as “a small village.” This means that, generally, any development should be confined to infill within the existing built-up area. Under the Core Strategy, infill is defined as “the filling of a small gap within the village that is only large enough for not more than a few dwellings, generally only one dwelling.” The Council took the view that the developer’s proposals for four houses on the site were more than just infill.

Other arguments put forward by the developer were also unsuccessful.

In some situations, development will be permitted, even in the case of a small village, and even where the proposals go beyond infill. There remains a presumption in favour of sustainable development, and Wiltshire’s Core Strategy says that development will be supported where it seeks to meet local housing needs, provided other conditions are met.

In the Mews case, the developer argued its proposals would help meet that housing need. However, the Council did not accept this argument. Instead, it took the view that any shortfall would be met from other, allocated, sites. It also considered that, in any case, any contribution made by the proposed development would be insignificant in its impact on housing supply. In short, the development’s potential benefits did not outweigh other policy factors, which operate to protect the distinct nature of Lydiard as a small village.

In reaching their decision, Wiltshire Council appear to have been influenced by a recent Court of Appeal judgment, which (hopefully) may restore some clarity to the complex relationship between housing supply and planning policy.

In the past, several developers have successfully challenged planning refusals where the local authority could not demonstrate an adequate five-year supply of land for housing. Not only is there a presumption in favour of sustainable development, the National Planning Policy Framework says relevant policies should not be considered up-to-date if the local authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites” (NPPF, paragraph 49).

In practice, this has sometimes made it harder for local authorities to rely upon policies which could restrict housing growth. For example, Wiltshire’s failure to show an adequate five-year supply of land for housing was instrumental in Gleeson Home’s success in Calne. Despite initial refusal and strong local opposition, permission was given on appeal for a 125 home development.

Significantly, however, the judgment also confirms that it is down to local authorities to determine how much weight to attach to policies that are not up-to-date. Wiltshire Council appear to have relied upon this reasoning in deciding the Mews application. In their view, there are still sufficient grounds for refusing the application, notwithstanding they cannot demonstrate a five-year land supply for housing.

The Jubilee Club House was the scene of heated debate over the future development of Lydiard Millicent.

Local resident, Mike Sharp, organised the meeting for Wednesday evening to discuss Star Planning’s latest proposals for land at the end of the Mews, by the Orchards.

Following an initial, low key, drop-in session last month, Star Planning have now submitted a formal application for planning permission to build “up to four dwellings” on the land.

The latest application

The immediate application is for outline planning permission, which would give consent in principle for for up to four houses to be built. You can view these on Wiltshire Council’s website.

Although some layout plans and landscaping particulars accompany the application, these are for illustrative purposes only. Should permission be granted, it would then be down to the developer to specify the type of houses, their design and layout, when they go back to the Council for approval of reserved matters.

Some feel that this makes it difficult to assess how the prospective development would look on the ground, or what its actual impact would be. For example, the reality “on the ground” of four four-bed houses could be very different from a mixed development of bungalows and starter homes. However, the developer considers that the illustrations should give sufficient information to allow the application to be determined. In material terms, they say, it should make little difference in terms of trafiic flow.

Wider concerns

During Wednesday’s meeting, however, residents also voiced concern over possible plans to build up to 35 new homes on the land immediately to the south of the application site. They feared such plans would impact negatively on Lydiard’s village feel and encouarge coalesence with Swindon. As access, prospectively, would be off Meadow Springs or Holborn, some residents also feared that wider plans to develop this area could result in increased traffic and the creation of a “rat run” from Swindon.

The land, immediately to the south and south-east of the application site, is believed to be in the same ownership as the application site.

No application has been made in respect of the wider site yet. However, one local drew attention to the site survey and aboricultural report accompanying the application. Both relate to a much larger area than the original application, and the initial ecological appraisal is headed “Lydiard Millicent, North Phase.”

David Barnes of Star Planning said no decision had been made in respect of the larger site, but that all the options were “being looked at, at the moment.”

Objections to the immediate proposals

During the course of the meeting, residents expressed a number of concerns. These included;

During the meeting, a number of residents mentioned the emergent neighbourhood plan.

The draft neighbourhood plan for Lydiard Millicent sets out the type of housing residents would like to see (bungalows, smaller properties) and location. One of its guiding principles is that the community in Lydiard Millicent should retain its own idenity and remain a separate village, avoiding coalescence with Swindon.

Where there is an adopted neighbourhood plan, planners have to take account of it.

Work started on Lydiard Millicent’s neighbourhood plan in 2011. Lydiard’s draft Chapter of the Neighbourhood Plan was finalised in 2014. However, over two years later, the neighbourhood plan is still no closer to adoption. This means it will be unable to influence decisions over developments such as the one proposed at the Mews.